[pure-silver] Re: Chemical subsitution
- From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:57:37 -0700
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Nelson" <emanmb@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 8:58 AM
Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Chemical subsitution
Thanks again.
Back when I was at RIT, (when dinosours roamed the
earth), I did a project where I mixed D-72 5 times,
each mix missing a different one of the 5 components
to demonstrate the effect of each when printing.
Without sulfite the developer worked poorly and was
dark brown showing the importance of it preservative
aspects.
So here's a follow up question. Does it matter which
one I buy now? For formulas calling for bi or meta,
is it "better" to have these exact compounds? Just
wondering if I should stock them both.
Eric
--- Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
According to Ryuji Suzuki, Dr. Nishimura, and others,
most commercially packaged Sodium Bisulfite is actually
Sodium Metabisulfite. This was known to Kodak when they made
up the formulas specifying the Bisulfite. Evidently, there
is no difference once they are dissolved in water. I would
buy whatever is available in the requisite purity at the
lowest price.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts:
